In this decision, the Court held that the “litigation exception” to the federal Drivers’ Privacy Protection Act of 1994 did not cover the use of protected driver information by attorneys to solicit business, differentiating between “[a]n attorney’s solicitation of new clients” and “an attorney’s conduct on behalf of his client or the court.” The suit was remanded to the 4th Circuit.

Among the questions to be answered by that court is that of the purpose of the attorney communications with potential clients. Heinke says that this question, along with that of the attorney’s permissible conduct under another exception to the DPPA, could help attorneys circumvent the Court’s opinion, adding “There's likely to be future litigation at least over how to determine what a predominant purpose for sending a notice is.”